Sridevi W/O Alte Mallikarjun Isapnore v. Haiyyali S/O Muttappa Pujari and Anr.

Karnataka HC18 Jul 2013MFA/30100/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident case, the High Court allowed a first appeal against a below award of Rs. 1,63,000. The court recognized a disability of 20% and fixed monthly income at Rs. 4,500/-, enhancing the award to Rs. 2,25,000/- and directing the deposit of the balance Rs. 62,000/- with interest.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent-Insurance company to deposit Rs. 62,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of application.

Sridevi W/O Alte Mallikarjun Isapnore Vs Haiyyali… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶2

CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY 2013

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.30100/2013 (MV)

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sridevi, W/o late Mallikarjun Isapnore, Aged about 42 years, Occ;Milk Vendor, R/o Huda-B, now at Ganga Nagar, Gulbarga.

¶9

…. Appellant.

¶10

(By Sri Shivasharan Reddy, Adv.)

¶11

And:

¶12

1 Haiyyali, S/o Muttappa Pujari, Aged about 42 years, Occ;Driver-cum-owner of Autorickshaw bearing Reg.No.KA-32/A-3276, R/o H.No.11-31, Huda-B, Taluka Sedam, Gulbarga Dist.585 101.

¶13

¶14

2 The Manager, Sri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd., E-8 EPIP RITCO, Sitapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302 022.

¶15

…. Respondents.

¶16

(By Smt.Sangeetha Bhadrashetty, Adv.for R2 Notice to R1 dispensed with)

¶17

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 3.1.2012 in MVC No.456/2010 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gulbarga, etc.

¶18

This Miscellaneous First Appeal coming on for Admission this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in

¶21

MVC No.456/2010 dated 3.1.2012 on the file of the Principal Senior

¶22

Civil Judge and MACT, Gulbarga whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.1,63,000/- with 6% interest

¶23

per annum from the date of the petition till the date of petition.

¶24

¶25

Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the

¶26

claimant was aged 40 years at the time of the accident. She was doing milk vending business and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. She was hospitalised for 11 days. The Tribunal has taken her income only at Rs.4,000/- per month. It is argued that having regard to the nature of injury sustained by her, the award of compensation on all other heads requires enhancement.

¶27

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the

¶28

second respondent-Insurance Company has sought to justify the impugned judgment and award.

¶29

I have carefully considered the arguments of the learned

¶30

Counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record.

¶31

There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and

¶32

the liability of the second respondent-Insurance Company to pay compensation.

¶33

¶34

It is evident that the accident had occurred on 24.3.2010.

¶35

The claimant has contended that she was earning Rs.6,000/- per month by doing milk vending business. However, no materials have been produced in support of her contention. The Tribunal has taken Rs.3,000/- per month towards her monthly income. Since the accident had occurred on 24.3.2010, her income is notionally fixed at Rs.4,500/- per month. The multiplier applicable is 15.

¶36

It is evident from the Doctor’s evidence that the claimant

¶37

had sustained grievous injuries. The Doctor has come to a conclusion that there is difficulty in sitting, cross-legged, squatting, and she is walking with support. There is difficulty in walking on uneven or slope. There is shortening of leg by 1½ inch. It is also clear that the claimant is limping while walking. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the permanent disability to the whole body at 20%. Taking her monthly income as Rs.4,500/- with the application of multiplier 15 and 20% permanent disability to the whole body, the claimant is entitled for Rs.1,62,000/- towards loss of future earning. The claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.9,000/-

¶38

¶39

towards loss of earning during the laid up period. The award of compensation on all other heads is just and reasonable. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation as under:

¶40

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount
1	Towardsloss of futureincome	Rs.1,62,000.00
2	Towardspain and sufferings	Rs. 30,000.00
3	Towardsloss ofamenities	Rs.15,000.00
4	Towards loss of income during the laid up period	Rs. 9,000.00
5	Towards attendant, nursing, extra nourishment charges and conveyance	Rs. 5,000.00
6	Towards medical expenses	Rs. 4,000.00
	*TOTAL*	*Rs.2,25,000.00*

¶41

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,63,000/- which

¶42

has to be deducted from the aforesaid amount and the balance of compensation payable to the claimant is Rs.62,000/-. The said sum of Rs.62,000/- shall carry interest at 6% per annum.

¶43

In the result, the appeal succeeds and it is accordingly

¶44

allowed in part. The second respondent – Insurance company is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.62,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the application till the date of deposit within

¶45

¶46

a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount on its deposit.

¶47

Smt. Sangeetha Bhadrashetty, learned Counsel is permitted

¶48

to file her vakalth on behalf of R2 within four weeks from today. No

¶49

costs.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE.

¶51

BMM/-

Sridevi W/O Alte Mallikarjun Isapnore v. Haiyyali S/O Muttappa Pujari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sridevi W/O Alte Mallikarjun Isapnore v. Haiyyali S/O Muttappa Pujari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mangalamma W/O Late Vijayakumar Vs Rangayya Swamy Alias Gangayya S/O Virupakshayya

Beerappa S/O Siddappa Pujari Vs Motilal Satappa Naik and Anr.

Mahamood S/O Chandsab Shaikh Vs Malleshappa S/O Shivaraya Walikar and Anr.

Smt Ratna W/O Channaveerappa Gadad Ors. Vs Basavaraj @ Somashekar S/O Malleshappa Sajjan

Smt Mumtaz Begum Vs Smt Sharifa Bee

Laxmi W/O Ashok Mustagir Anr. Vs Khaja Hussain Anr.